?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
28 September 2004 @ 02:00 pm
Hello~ :D  
Hi everyone~ I'm new here. Well, kind of. I've joined this community some while ago, but this is my first post. ^^

I don't know if many you frequent the Hagaren forum at Anime Suki (I'm just a lurker there, lol), but there's this interview with Arakawa-sensei translated and posted by Yebyosh on the same forum that I thought it would be really interesting to read if you haven't yet. ^^ And there's official word that Arakawa is a woman, for the still non-believers XD!

I find interesting that, while Arakawa states that she truly believes in "Equivalent Trade", the anime is trying to show that it is not the truth of the world, actually. This definitely makes the anime and manga completely different, eh.

And here it ends my first post here because I couldn't think of anything else to say. Um, nice to meet you guys? XD;
 
 
Current Mood: sleepysleepy
Current Music: Rie Fu - Life is Like a Boat
 
 
 
Feriawithout_reason on September 28th, 2004 11:13 am (UTC)
It really is interesting how both the manga and anime have completely different views now. ^^;

What I find amazing is that Hagaren is only her first series. She's so awesome! <3
mikkeneko on September 28th, 2004 12:18 pm (UTC)
On equivalent trade...
I find interesting that, while Arakawa states that she truly believes in "Equivalent Trade", the anime is trying to show that it is not the truth of the world, actually.

I started getting that sense quite a while ago, in the anime. Something about the plot seemed to be trying to tell us that equivalent trade was not so much a principle of the world, as it was a principle of the human mind. Human beings -- and yes, even adults -- like things to be fair and just; they cry out in outrage against gross injustice, and they also are inherently suspicious about good things that seem to come with no price tag attached.

[Episode 50 spoilers]

Um. Yeah.

The way Dante said it, actually, is not at all logically contradictory to the brothers' philosophy of equivalent trade. She made the case that it's possible to give things without getting anything in return; the principle of toukakoukan only states that it's impossible to get anything without giving something. It's a case of "'If P then Q' does not necessarily mean that 'If not P then not Q.'"

Of course, the counterpoint that seemed obvious to me is that if equivalent trade isn't true, then giving something may not always result in getting something, but it makes it possible to get more than you give, too. I'm particularly interested by that thing that Hohenheim said in episode 50 -- that he'd discovered that "when there is love, as between a parent and child, there is no need for such things as reward and sacrifice."
angsty lemon ukewabisuke on September 28th, 2004 01:28 pm (UTC)
Re: On equivalent trade...
on a biological standpoint, a parent looking out for its offspring is a form of sacrifice/reward system. Kid dies = your genes don't get passed down = you lose in the war of survival. So I dunno. I tend to believe in the equivilant trade deal on a more generalized standpoint. Dante gets too specific. Of course some people are going to fail a test, but that doesn't mean that one truth is going to necessarily mean the same for another example.
mikkeneko on September 28th, 2004 04:09 pm (UTC)
Re: On equivalent trade...
Kid dies = your genes don't get passed down = you lose in the war of survival.

I've never been too impressed by this theory. Find me a parent out there who can say with a straight face that their primary interest is 'winning the war of survival.' Why should any individual person give a damn if their genes are passed on in the race or not? They won't be here to see it. The idea that we should care that some person, who happens to have slightly more genes in common with us than the 99.998% of genes why share anyway, will be around a hundred years in the future is entirely an abstract one, and has nothing to do with parenting or indeed any kind of social relations.

Individual people look out for themselves; the species as a whole looks out for the children, by tricking us into feeling hormone-related affection for small babies or members of the opposite sex. Except that's a semantic fantasy. Who's tricking us? Evolution, with a capital E, is not some anthropomorphic identity sitting out in the ether with a cunning agenda and a bag of tricks. Do we love each other because that's what allowed our species to survive up till this point? Or did we as a species survive up till this point because we love each other?

And what difference does it make?
angsty lemon ukewabisuke on September 28th, 2004 04:52 pm (UTC)
Re: On equivalent trade...
That's why I said from a BIOLOGICAL standpoint. Humans, animals, bacteria, whatever. I won't argue anymore on this because it will get messy if one side is passionate about one thing while the other isn't.
mikkeneko on September 28th, 2004 06:08 pm (UTC)
Re: On equivalent trade...
That's why I said from a BIOLOGICAL standpoint.

Mmm, yeah. Of course, from a biological standpoint, we're no more than a moving, heat-producing, electrically charge lump of individually supportive cells, none of which watch FMA, debate philosophy, or raise children.

Looking at things from a biological standpoint is like printing with only a red color plate. It's accurate, yes, and it's even colorful, but it's not going to give you a picture of reality.
oysterverse on September 28th, 2004 07:19 pm (UTC)
Re: On equivalent trade...
Mmm, yeah. Of course, from a biological standpoint, we're no more than a moving, heat-producing, electrically charge lump of individually supportive cells, none of which watch FMA, debate philosophy, or raise children.

::snerk::
jubilee 究裨理 / 樹琵理慰jubileerain on September 28th, 2004 12:24 pm (UTC)
thanx 4 posting this! welcome!
☂ Internet trickster: Riza Hawkeye / Protection / merainmage on September 28th, 2004 01:54 pm (UTC)
So she grew up in a dairy farm... That solves the cow avatar enigma XD
Tashatasha_mac on September 28th, 2004 01:56 pm (UTC)
Oooh, good call. Now the mystery is solved. XD
Tasha: Greed says no! - by lelldoritasha_mac on September 28th, 2004 02:01 pm (UTC)
Personally...I think the anime saying there's no such thing as equivalent trade is a simple way to allow them to not have to fill in any plot holes. All the things we're asking about the Gate and everything else can now be easily explained with "life sucks, there is no equivalent trade". The biggest question I had was

{EPISODE 50 SPOILERS}

when Hohenheim explained the souls of those that die in the Otherworld are the energy needed to create the alchemy reaction in their world. If equivalent trade were true, then what does the Otherworld get in trade for their souls being used for alchemy? But, since it isn't, it just sucks to be them.
Running Amok at an Eateryraane on September 28th, 2004 03:31 pm (UTC)
For some reason, that makes me think that every time an alchemist does a transmutation in his/her world, somebody randomly drops dead in the Otherworld. ...then I start thinking about the masturbation kitties. >.